We are continuing to work on updates to our Privacy Policy and GDPR Compliance. Currently, I am missing certain information. That has been requested and will be added as soon as it is available. I am not able at this time to give an exact date for completion but I agree this is an urgent priority and will update the information ASAP.

NAMA threatens NamaWineLake

This evening, communication has been received from Hayes Solicitors, acting on behalf of NAMA, threatening that unless a commitment is given not to publish the table referred to in this blogpost, then NAMA will seek “injunctive relief” to prevent such publication. The table referred to in the blogpost on John Fraher’s affidavit purports to show 103 loans with the name of the borrower which in some cases is an individual or group of individuals and in others is a company or business. Each of 103 loans shows “Full due diligence nominal value local currency” and “final acquisition value, euro” or in layman’s terms what appears to be the par value of the loan and the NAMA valuation. Remember NAMA has acquired €74bn of loans at par value and paid 43c in the euro on average, or €32bn in total.

What is exceptional is that John’s affidavit reveals evidence that NAMA is sharing, or at least shared in John’s case, details of loans owing by people connected to John, but also people unconnected to John directly but merely connected to borrowers who are in turn connected to John. Not just that, but NAMA seemingly disclosed not just the par value or nominal value of the loans but the value at which the loans were acquired by the Agency.

So it looks like Nama leaked info, and then NAMA is threatening some for publishing said info.

And it is to be noted that NamaWinelake is acting honorably, and redacted some of the the information pre-publication, and is now seeking Data Protection Commissioner guidance on it.

At the very least I hope Nama thought long and hardd before bringing this threat against NamaWinelake, who has performed a sterling public service in general

cYp

Actually I think they are saying that the information disclosed involved a breach of privacy of third parties, that as such they will not publish it, but will forward on what was given to them to the DPC to allow him to make a determination and to take action if the material involves a breach of the Data Protection legislation.

Ever since the first day I heard about NAMA and what it was going to be, I knew it would simply be another massive state run quango without any accountability, that it would go on for years (if not decades), that it would be stuffed to the hilt with vested interests and 'establishment' cronies and that it would cost us all a f***in' fortune...

NAMA is simply another unaccountable state monolith which should never have existed in the first place and which needs to be obliterated ASAP...